Media versus Venezuela

The recent anti-government protests in Caracas, Venezuela, in direct protest of President Nicolas Maduro, have not only taken the country by storm, but social media as well.

Social media is uncovering the truths and lies behind what Venezuelans, and Americans, hear and see through mainstream broadcast news. Recently, former president Hugo Chavez forced a slant in media coverage, making Venezuelan broadcasters report biased and political propaganda-driven news.

This has caused the new generation of Venezuelans to take action—this time, not in a physical manner.

“I don’t trust our television and radio stations at all,” said Adriana Sanchez in a brief interview with USA Today in Caracas. “The government stations just run propaganda, while the few privately owned stations are afraid to broadcast the truth. What other options do we have?”

Many Venezuelans have resorted to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram to stay informed and to understand the discrepancy between what they see on their television screens and what they read online. While both the government and the opposition are using social media to promote their own agendas, the truth is more readily available to citizens who need it most—including journalists.

According to the Venezuelan news website, panorama.com.ve, media outlets have been victimized by protesters and police harassing journalists on the streets.

CNN reported this week that its news crew had its cameras and transmission taken away at gunpoint.

This suppressive nature of news journalism has had a tremendous impact on what major news corporations and publications from around the world are reporting. While the chaos continues to unravel in Venezuela, news outlets such as CNN, The New York Times, BBC, and Al Jazeera English, have all had minimal coverage of Venezuela due to this lack of information.

Therefore, it has been up to Venezuelans to make a stand for their rights and their country without fighting fire with fire. From the Venezuelan-Americans of Miami to the new generation of Venezuelan descendants around the world, social media has provided more ways to uncover the truth than ever before.

Venezuela: No voice, no democracy

By SOFIA ORTEGA

Students have been out on the streets of every major city in Venezuela since Feb. 12, leaving until today six deaths, many injured, and hundreds arrested.

Leopoldo López, one of the opposition leaders from the political party “Volundad Popular,” urged all citizens to march peacefully against the regime of President Nicolás Maduro to put an end to the economic and social crisis of the country.

Maduro also summoned his followers to a manifest for “peace” in which he claimed indirectly to López, “Coward, fascist, surrender yourself that we are looking for you.”

The government issued a captive order to López for the incidents that happened at the march on Feb. 12. He was charged with conspiracy, arson, homicide and terrorism.

López turned himself to the authorities in front of tens of thousands protesters.

“If my imprisonment serves to awaken this town, so be it,” López said shortly before turning himself. “I have nothing to fear. I will always give the face.”

Even though the most serious charges (murder and terrorism) were dropped; if López is convicted he could face up to 10 years of jail.

But who is it really to blame?

According to the constitution, Venezuelans have the right to protest peacefully.

President Maduro blames it on activist Leopoldo López for calling the opposition to protest.

However, images and videos not shown by the media in Venezuela are proof that the National Guard is using arms against civilians and that they are the authors of the crimes that occurred.

Yes, military. The ones who promise the country to look for its citizens are shooting, torturing and beating students.

The protests are not only being held in Venezuela, but all around the world.

Today, it is not anymore a problem of different political ideologies, but about the safety and the millions of innocent people that die every day in Venezuela.

Students in Venezuela are risking their lives at the protests to because they want democracy, freedom of speech, safety.

As well, students living outside of Venezuela have become the voice of the country. They are effectively using social media to expand the truth and welcome people to join their struggle.

It is uncertain what the future holds for Venezuela, but protests are growing stronger and leave no signal of ending soon.

News coverage of dangerous trends

By NICOLE HOOD

In the last year, CNN has covered two dangerous trends: a game called “Knockout” and another called “Neknominate.”

Knockout is a dangerous game that CNN started covering in November 2013. It entails one individual (generally in a group of teenagers) going up to a stranger and punching them with the intention of knocking them out instantaneously.

CNN has also reported that Knockout has caused more than one death in the Northeastern states of the US. Videos of teenagers doing this generally come from security cameras on streets, and news coverage showed these videos with the intention of exposing the game and impressing upon people really how lethal and irrational the game can be.

Neknominate, on the other hand, is a drinking game that has become trendy through social media. Videos are easily accessible and abundant on the internet.  Here, an individual generally downs a hefty amount of alcohol mixed with something else, takes a video of it and, upon finishing the drink, the individual nominates a friend to out-do them within the next 24 hours.

Videos show teenagers not only downing usual mixed drinks but, in an effort to out-do their friends, players have mixed in their drink with a dead mouse, goldfish, insects, engine oil and dog food. Five people have died from playing this game, all being men under the age of 30. News coverage battles social media and the spread of this openly videoed social trend.

While players of one game generally avoid social media (for the risk involved of going to jail or juvy), players of another game use social media as a form of pressure to encourage others to play. Either way, the news reporters step in not only to report what is happening but to prevent others from participating in social trends that appeal to one’s (generally teenager’s) dangerous need to prove themselves to their friends or to the public.

In my last blog post, I wrote about the dangers of news pieces including certain social topics. In this post, however, I’d like to acknowledge how using social topics in the news can put a much needed negative spin on social trends. Of course, these social trends are newsworthy partially because the harm coming from them are not temporary but rather fatal, and most players don’t realize that.

People who watch these videos of Neknominate on Facebook might see it as an exciting challenge or other, uninvolved viewers might find it fascinating that someone would drink liquor out of a toilet or successfully drink something with a dead rat in it.

The news’ video compilation presents the same content but instead of a bunch of kids sitting around a computer oohing and aahing at a friend doing something nasty, the video shows a wider audience how Neknominating is fickle and dangerous.

Sources:

Why can’t Hollywood be more original?

By KYLA THORPE

It seems to happen nearly every year. Movie producers in Hollywood are often doing reboots of films that were big hits.

Why can’t they just leave the original film alone? Don’t they realize that it’s a little strange to recreate movies, with new actors, when the original actors are still alive and well, able to continue their previous roles?

I can understand rebooting a film that was created 40 or more years ago. The film could’ve been terrible back then and producers want to make something big of it now.  Maybe Hollywood wants to bring a trend back, make some extra cash. I get it, it’s a business.

What really annoys me is how movies that were terrific not even more than 10 years ago are being remade into newer films with terrible reviews.

For example, I remember seeing the original Spider-Man movie in the theater in 2002. I loved it. The world loved it. Tobey Maguire played this role until 2007, ending the series with Spider-Man 3.

So why was it rebooted in 2012 and called the Amazing Spider-Man, with a new actor, Andrew Garfield?

This is strange to me and confusing. Between the original Spider-Man and the Amazing Spider-Man, there isn’t even 10 years. They could’ve just asked Tobey Maguire to come back and restart the series!

Doesn’t Hollywood hire script writers to create new material? Are there no other superheroes within the Marvel or DC Comic Universe for them to create an extensive series about?

The reason why I’m asking this question is that, today, the cast for the new Fantastic Four movie was released. The Fantastic Four movie, that I also saw in the theater, came out in 2005. The new one is slated for 2015.

Reboots for movies that aren’t at least 20 years old are unnecessary. The point of a reboot is to make something better, to bring it more to life.

Reboots are usually rated lower, have around the same CGI and have similar story lines where the audience is not at all very surprised by the ending.

When will Hollywood stop doing this?

Olympics: World news or gossip?

By NICOLE HOOD

The Olympics are at the forefront of today’s world news. However, there are moments when I question the priority of news reporters.

The other day, I went on CNN and the first thing I saw was U.S. ice skater Ashley Wagner’s face of disappointment at her score.

There are many things about the Olympics to report on that hold a lot of significance — the condition of Sochi as a city to host such a big event, human rights problems in Russia, countries’ relative numbers of medals — but, in my view, an athlete’s lack of composition in such an intense moment is not worthy of the front page of such a major world news website.

In my opinion, to place a picture of the face of disappointment as one of the ‘five favorite moments from the first weekend of the Olympics’ is a cruel joke. The article drew just as much attention to a few seconds of infuriated disappointment as it did to Russia winning its first gold medal in the games and total medals won after the first weekend.

To be fair, the article featured Jamie Anderson’s (American gold medalist) tweet about her gratitude to friends and family after her great performance. Although this is another example of social media appearing in the world news, at least it’s fitting under the category of “favorite moments.” Amy Wagner’s face was not on this list because it was endearing, it was because it was scandalous.

Do we really find scandals so important that they should be put in newspapers? Are we looking for ways to interest the public in the 2014 Olympics? Are we just fixated on having a list of five that the reporters felt inclined to place this example in with the rest?

The second question can be answered with a simple “no,” as the first sub-headline of the report, the first example, was “That face.” This was the first topic presented to the audience.

I urge reporters to at least think about the first two questions before they choose topics. When presented side-by-side, news transfer a sense of importance. An important event may elevate another’s importance, even if the latter doesn’t attract that much on its own. On the other hand, something like gossip in world news could end up downplaying an event that makes a difference.

A multimillion-dollar media holiday

By NICOLE LOPEZ-ALVAR

When most people think of Valentine’s Day, the images that come to mind are chocolates, flowers, cards, and candlelit dinners—all manufactured images by advertisers and media companies that have perfected their techniques of triggering viewers’ tear ducts into consumerism. Once the holiday approaches, people are compelled to be suddenly generous and search for the ideal gift for loved ones, and it comes at a price.

The average person spends about $130 on Valentine’s Day each year, with men spending roughly double the amount of women. “The average man plans to shell out $135.35 to impress the people in his life while women only expect to spend $72.28,” stated a survey.

Advertisements continuously promote manufactured love—filled with clichéd greeting cards and abundant heart-shaped chocolates. Many people feel obligated by these unrealistic expectations portrayed through media to buy gifts, reserve dinners at fancy restaurants, and send Valentine cards to loved ones out of pure obligation to this mainstream holiday.

The Greeting Card Association states that about 190 million Valentine’s Day cards are sent each year, and that does not include the millions of cards exchanged by kids as well.

Furthermore, it is the most prosperous holiday for florists, with about 224 million roses grown every year before February. Data shows that 64 percent of men and 36 percent of women buy flowers for Valentine’s Day, according to the IPOS-Insight Floral Trends Consumer Tracking Study.

These costly expectations directly and indirectly affect relationships as well.

About six million people anticipate or plan a marriage proposal on Feb. 14 every year, creating a stigma that pressures many couples into making major decisions on a deadline. Coincidently, condom sales rapidly increase right before the holiday. According to the Indo-Asian News Service, “sales of condoms increase up to 20 percent during Valentine’s week,” which coincides with the supposed $15 million spent on infertility and pregnancy tests the following weeks after, according to The Nielsen Company.

All expenses aside, the holiday’s significance in American culture, and in cultures around the world, is founded in the precious nature of relationships—whether with a significant other, family, friends, or even colleagues and classmates.  While mainstream media have created a multimillion-dollar industry out of the holiday, Valentine’s Day is a reminder to make sure the people who mean the most in your life know they are loved. Maybe advertisers and corporations do have the right idea, after all.

Kennedy and changing TV journalism

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

With the JFK assassination 50th anniversary upon us today, many people are looking back on how this event has shaped history. One thing it did change was the way Americans watched TV for news.

It is said that through the coverage that CBS broadcast about McCarthyism in the 1950s, this was the rise of broadcast journalism. But the assassination of John F. Kennedy in 1963 also made a large impact and marked the point when Americans began to get most of their news and information from television.

From the time there were reports of the first shot fired on that fateful day to days later when the funeral was broadcast live, Americans were focused on their television sets. Until this event, on-going live coverage of a major news event had not happened.

Broadcast journalism has evolved in the sense that now it follows the subject from the beginning to the end. Reports are a narrative now. It became the most accessible medium of news. (Until the Internet came to play, however.)

Kennedy had won the hearts of many Americans by using the television. Since TV was becoming more of a commodity for everyone to have in their homes, people were more in tune with Kennedy and his family and they were more aware of the Kennedys because of the images the TV provided. During the Kennedy/Nixon debates, for example, in the 1960 campaign for president, more than 70 million viewers were tuned in and this is around the time when people in the U.S. were purchasing their first television sets.

When people look back on the assassination, what is mostly remembered are the images that TV had provided at the time, which includes the youngest Kennedy child, John Jr., saluting his dead father during the funeral procession.

The arrest of Lee Harvey Oswald and his assassination by Jack Ruby was also televised that weekend. It was the first time a murder had been televised live to the nation and world. Something that was new to the world at the time.

News has always been about immediacy and accuracy but, after all this happened, it soon became more investigative and thoughtful about the events that were occurring.

These series of events would also shape coverage of the Vietnam War later in the decade as well. The advancement of technology continued to grow and the maturity of broadcast journalism did as well. It became more known that televised news was a more profitable news medium and this was the start of the decline of print journalism.

Broadcast journalism is what helped bring the American people together during that time of despair and has continued to through history and the present.

Deciding what news to broadcast

By MARISSA YOUNG

In my first blog post, I wrote about how news programs are becoming increasingly lenient about their definition of news.  On Monday, Al Sunshine, a former Miami broadcast journalist, spoke to one of my classes.  He brought up another issue: Do we, as journalists, give our audiences what they want or need to hear?

Audiences might want to hear about the latest celebrity gossip: who slept with whom, who’s pregnant, who was caught doing drugs in the bathroom. Other than entertainment, that news has no effect on most people’s daily lives.

But people need to hear about other issues. They need to know about unexpected weather conditions. They need to know about the latest disease outbreak. They might not want to, but they need to know what politicians are doing with their tax money (even if it isn’t scandalous).

So how do you decide what to give audiences?  An obvious solution would be to air both types of stories.  With time and space limits, though, that is impractical. Companies air stories that are of popular interest because they attract the most viewers. However, when it comes down to it, the need to know about certain issues trumps media companies’ concerns about viewership and profitability.

Sometimes, stories can be an issue of life or death. For example, if a certain toy has been recalled because of a toxic part, parents need to know to take it away from their children.

If there is time to air only one story, one that is either popular or critical, is there really an option here?

Could any journalist with a sense of human dignity choose better ratings over the chance to save someone’s life?  Is it better to risk concealing potentially lifesaving information than to risk boring some audience members for a couple minutes?

There is a reason it’s called NEEDING to know, and we must remember this when deciding which news to broadcast.  This way, there will be no guilt hanging over journalists’ heads if they do their best to tell viewers anything that might be vital.

American journalism as it Is today

By MATIAS WODNER

A recent Los Angeles Times article about a well-known author caught my attention because of a quotation within the article. Michael Lewis, author of The Blind Side and Moneyball was attributed with the quote:

“Going from American journalism to British journalism is like going from bratwurst to Mexican food,” he says. “You go from feeling kind of constipated to feeling like you got the runs.”

In addition to being a funny comment, it is also a bit of a scary one to think about, at least from a journalistic perspective. If I’ve learned anything about the news media and about journalism over the past couple years or so, it’s that it is in a state of flux. It isn’t doing well, it isn’t doing horribly, but no one is really sure what to think of it. It has also been challenged in many ways due to ethical problems and controversial scenarios.

And that’s from my perspective in North America.

With that being said, the fact that a respected writer like Lewis is saying that the British side of things is worse off makes me a little uneasy. Not because I plan on moving to Great Britain, but because it means that journalism in America can get even worse. It isn’t overly something to worry about at the moment, and there is still some fine journalism going around, but there is a lot of poor journalism as well.

Fake stories, wrong sourcing, poor grammar, the list goes on. With this booming technological age that we are in, there will undoubtedly be bad journalism. Being first to break a story has become more important than delivering journalistic gold that takes patience.

I’m not sure what it will take to get back to the golden age of journalism or whether we ever will again. But we can at least report the truth, and do it eloquently. Then maybe some of the bad journalists will be scraped out.

Is journalism still important?

By REBECCA FERNANDEZ

With news media changing faster than you can tweet, Tumble or post about it … it is hard to weigh the importance of journalism in this Digital Age.

Print journalism is going through a difficult time: facing deaths of newspapers and media outlets. Is journalism at risk as well?

Many people ask: “What is it that journalists actually do? How do we define a journalist? How is a journalist different than a blogger?” Traditionally, journalists go to the scene themselves and write, narrate, or shoot what is happening. They investigate and publish stories.

In our modern Digital Age, journalists have the ability to do more with the power of technology. We really had a hands-on experience in this through the Scavenger Hunt project in our CNJ 208 reporting class. They filter the clatter of the Internet by gathering all of the relevant articles in one story. They use these powerful new ways of communication to bring attention to important issues, whether they reported first or not. They live-blog and retweet the revolutions by introducing raw facts.

There is a need for professional journalists, not because they know how to write, but because they follow the rules and journalistic ethics, and they are competent about many topics they report on.

Journalism is still relevant, but it has definitely changed.

Facebook users would be large country

By REBECCA FERNANDEZ

Facebook founder Mark Zuckerberg said that the social network now has 1 billion friends.

“Just so we’re clear: As of Sept. 14, one in seven people on this planet has been classified as an active Facebook user,” said Zuckerberg. “If Facebook was a country, it would have the third largest population, right behind China (1,347,350,000) and India (1,210,200,000), and ahead of the United States (314,500,000).”

A recent Pew study showed that the percentage of all Americans getting news from Facebook and other social networks has tripled since 2010. And the proportion of social networkers who regularly get news there has more than doubled.

The percentage of young adults getting news socially has increased from about 20 percent in 2010 to about 33 percent in 2012. The median age of Facebook users is now 22. That’s down from August 2008 when the median age peaked at 26. In January of 2006, the median user age was 19.

We don’t realize how much Facebook has impacted our world, so much so that it is taking over.

Typhoon Haiyan reporters risk their lives

By DANIELLE COHEN

Typhoon Haiyan was one of the powerful storms to ever be recorded and is believed to be the strongest typhoon to ever make landfall in human history.

With 10,000 deaths already confirmed by local officials and the reports of many that are left homeless and hungry, it is pretty clear how dangerous and destructive this storm actually was.

With storms and natural disasters, although it may be extremely dangerous, someone has to be the reporter to go to the location and actually report what is going on to benefit the world’s public knowledge and awareness. The reporter could potentially risk his or her life for the sake of reporting information.

A Filipino reporter named Atom Araullo has become an Internet sensation for being a strong reporter and actually going out in the mist of the typhoon to make live reports. He was beaten up by 379 km/h winds, according to NASA.

The reporter was reporting for ABS-CBN News and is now considered a hero on social media for being the brave reporter to face the storm.

The footage of the storm that Araullo reported live has gone viral on YouTube and has been viewed more than one million times.

Hours after the broadcast, Araullo was trending on Twitter.

The cameraman who recorded Araullo is also being recognized even though there is no information on his identity.

Because one reporter broadcast this information competitive stations also sent reporters to this dangerous natural disaster sight to report.

Jamela Alidogan, who reported live from the storm’s hardest hit city, Tacolban, and shared her horrifying story of how she almost did not survive the storm while reporting about the typhoon.

She told her story about how she went to the second story of a building and hung from the metal ceiling beams in a closet with many others for about an hour to remain safe until the ceiling actually started to give way. The roof eventually collapsed and there was a loud noise. She managed to hide in one of the closet shelves while the eye of the storm was just above her. She was prepared to jump, but decided to wait for help until the water and winds died down.

“I have covered armed conflict, but there is nothing like this, nothing as incredible and scary as covering a natural disaster like Typhoon Haiyan,” Alidogan stated in her report.

Reporters have an extremely important job of supplying news stations and the public with information that in situations like a national disaster is scarce and powerful. Reporters risk their lives to supply this information and it just shows the importance and necessity of the news as a source of information. Just one piece of footage of something this detrimental can summon millions.

For more information visit: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/521290/20131111/typhoon-haiyan-yolanda-philippines-atom-araullo-report.htm and http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/11/11/al-jazeera-reporter-typhoon-haiyan_n_4255916.html?utm_hp_ref=media

Journalism isn’t dying, it’s changing

By MELANIE MARTINEZ

Every holiday party or family get-together, it’s always the same thing. My relatives and their friends ask about boys and school. While my love life has fluctuated more than Oprah’s waistline (no offense, O) my college career has always been steady and focused. When asked about my major, I proudly reply, “Journalism,” which is always met with faces twisted in horror and concern.

“But honey, journalism is a dying career! Everybody knows that.”

Cue my usual exasperated sigh and excuse to beeline towards the snack table. I can feel their worried glances on my back. Poor thing. She needs to study a real major. 

I know my Com School peers have experienced similar fright-filled responses. But do not fret my fellow journalism majors, as I’m sure you know, there is no need to switch over to something “more reliable” like engineering or accounting … we all suck at math anyways.

It is true that the journalism industry is currently going through major changes, but that doesn’t mean that it’s dying out and that reporters are going extinct.

On the contrary, BLS data shows that the number of help-wanted ads for “news analysts, reporters, and correspondents” has increased by 15 percent compared to last year. More people are telling BLS that they have careers as news analysts, reporters and correspondents compared to a year ago.

The Digital Age isn’t taking away journalism jobs, instead it’s simply modifying the description. These help-wanted ads now use words such as “digital,” “Internet” and “mobile.”

And what’s wrong with that? This isn’t the first time journalism and media have withstood major change due to technology. From the emergence of the radio in the twenties to the television takeover in the fifties, journalists have adapted when it comes to times of major change through medium.

As history shows, when technology advances and culture changes, journalists develop new skills to keep up. Journalism hasn’t died out and won’t die out because of this willingness to understand, adapt and learn.

The common idea that “everyone’s a journalist,” due to the prevalence of blogging online, is an inaccurate notion. The news and media industry needs educated journalists capable of interpreting the news and delivering it in the unique way only trained writers and broadcasters can. That’s not to say that raw talent is non-existent, but not everyone has the needed skill set acquired through education.

I believe that journalism will continue to strive in this Internet-centered period due to the fact that young journalists are capable and equipped to handle the shift. They lack the dated habits of their older counterparts and join the industry with a strong grasp of today’s environment.

Instead of collapsing careers, journalism’s changing ways are creating more jobs and opportunities, available to the people who are skilled and opened to them.

So maybe our world is studded with tablets and phones and our eyes are more constantly met with screens than with paper. We will always need people to report and interpret life’s happenings, no matter the outlet. From town crier to Tweet and everything in between, journalism has evolved along with the world and will continue to do so in the ever-changing future.

How do blogs affect news?

By REBECCA COHEN

For starters, bloggers are the lucky ones. They have a lower standard to uphold and can therefore speak freely, with bias, opinion and all of the forbidden aspects of news writing.

Bloggers can speak without regard, because they have no boss. Their only standards to uphold are their own.

In journalism, it is frowned upon to use your boyfriend, best friend or cousin as a credible source; however, bloggers are free to use all three of these people – making their information easier to attain.

Although bloggers have the easier job, their work complies with news writing with a funny cycle.

If a person’s social media news feed is fluttered with their friend’s opinions on a certain topic, this will encourage users to want to know the facts. Fortunately, when people want the facts, they refrain from blogs and turn to the news.

If these users are equally as inspired as their Facebook friends were by a certain topic, they may take to sharing their opinions as well – thus continuing the cycle of blog-inspired news readings.

However, because blogs can be more entertaining than hard news, it becomes a struggle for news sites to compete. With the need for pictures, videos, colorful sites and interactive features, online news sites are compelled to comply with their new competition: the bloggers.

This competitive edge has led to website design, live news feeds, use of color, trends and advertisements on online news sites. News sites also broadcast on social media in order to compete with bloggers by featuring “share” buttons at the beginning or end of each online story.

Additionally, the interactive features on news stories have dramatically increased since social media has taken off. The incorporation of user comments, user photos, and overall user input allow online news sites to stay in the running against bloggers.

So, a little competition has pushed online news to new heights. And, no matter how much easier or controversial a blog story may be, no body of writing can replace the facts and credibility that is the news.

Videos as web stories: Where is the text?

By MARISSA YOUNG

The Internet is great for news because we can use it to tell stories in multiple forms, like both text and video.  Video can complement and enhance text stories, adding new information and content.  However, a problem I have been running into lately is having online stories that are only in video form.

For example, on CNN’s website, there are many news stories that are only video.  Granted, you can find the corresponding text version elsewhere on the site, but how hard would it be for CNN to pair the two together on the same webpage?

On my Facebook News Feed, people post human-interest stories that catch my attention, but to my dismay, often the stories have no text to accompany videos.  This is especially problematic when I am in a public setting, like a classroom (before class, not during…), and I am unable to watch or listen.

Sometimes, it is just an inconvenience and I can easily perform a Google search and find a text version of the story. This is generally the case with straight news stories.  It’s harder when the stories are not straight news, because these are the more unique stories that cannot be found on every news website’s homepage.

Often, I don’t have the time or patience to watch a video.  I’d rather have the story in front of me, where I can scan it and quickly get important details out of it.  With videos, it is difficult to locate the important details, and when you try to skip around, it usually ends up taking longer to watch with all the buffering and/or freezing that ensues.  Plus, videos generally require you to watch ads before the story, which is beneficial for the host site’s pockets, but is not in the interest of saving time.

Because it can be so complicated and frustrating to play videos, I usually don’t watch them at all.

Even though there are undoubtedly Internet users who prefer stories as videos, I think having a story only in video format can be detrimental to a story’s success.  Having a news story only in video format will lead viewers to other websites.

And the last thing a journalist wants is to lose readers to another similar story.

Media can inspire relationships

By DANIELLE COHEN

Back in 2012, a woman by the name of Elizabeth Wisdom posted a picture of Crater Lake in Oregon on her Instagram page.

This picture received 221 “likes” and various different comments. One of the comments which said “gasping I miss this place” was made by a man Elizabeth had never met. Because of their common interest in the lake and the public aspect of Instragram they decided to exchange phone numbers to chat.

Elizabeth decided she wanted to meet this man Denis face-to-face so she flew out to New Orleans to meet him. She Instragrammed a picture of Denis when she met him to document their weekend spent together.

From their comments back and fourth, it seemed that they were attracted to each ohter. As their relationship progressed Denis Instragrammed a picture of Elizabeth to document when they started to date.

Nine months later, Denis took Elizabeth to a barn near her home in Texas where she always dreamed of having her wedding. There he proposed to her in front of a “timeline” of their Instagram dating life which he printed out and put on the wall of the barn. The two are currently organizing their wedding.

It is amazing how social media networks can bring people together. People can post messages and images that others can relate to which in situations like this bring similar people together. If it wasn’t for Elizabeth’s hashtag on her Instagram about the Crater Lake, Denis would have never found Elizabeth.

I find this situation to be a rare occurrence because many people who meet on the Internet or on social media are taking a huge risk of the dangers behind their relationship. They have to take the chance of the possibility of talking to someone they don’t think they are talking to and sometimes maybe even a criminal or pedophile.

The movie and show “Catfish” is a prime example of this new relationship era. The show documents cyber relationships with the intentions of  bringing the two individuals together in person to see if the person they have been speaking too is actually the person that they thought.

Most of the time, the person is someone who lied about their identity. People who use media networks to “date” need to be extremely careful of all the dangerous people in the world today.

This dating is potentially dangerous and emotionally heartbreaking if you are talking to someone who lied about their identity.

It creates a world of people who do not know how to talk face to face. It creates a virtual world where people don’t interact in person and it is like love is evolving into a video game where they speak through typing.

Media networks bring people together in a sense, but essentially bring people physically apart due to lack of face-to-face connections.

For more information on Elizabeth and Denis: http://www.buzzfeed.com/ryanhatesthis/this-couple-met-fell-in-love-started-dating-and-got-engaged.

Social media can sway opinions

By DANIELLE COHEN

Two black customers at the high-end department store Barney’s in New York City claimed to be subjects of racial profiling by the store’s employees.

According to the Huffington Post, Barney’s has been criticized for profiling African-American customers. Trayon Christian and Kayla Phillip were separate victims who recently have been examples of Barney’s profiling instances.

Christian sued Barneys after he was accused of fraud after spending money at Barney’s when he bought a Ferragamo belt in April.

Phillips filed a notice that she will sue after detectives stopped her outside of Barney’s after she made a high-end purchase of a Celine bag in February.

The CEO of Barneys, Mark Lee, apologized and claimed they have hired a civil rights expert to address the situation.

This situation is not only hurtful to Christian and Phillips and the people who could relate to this situation, but it is hurting Jay-Z and his fashion collaboration.

Jay-Z, who grew up in a life of crime in Brooklyn, is now an international star and rapper. He is very aware of civil rights. He is thoughtful and thinks about his  labels and if they would be considered racist.

He also stood up and spoke about the killing of Trayvon Marton, a black teenager who was killed because he was mistaken to be dangerous just because of his race.

Jay-Z is currently in the processes of collaborating with Barney’s to create a jewelry line and clothing line for the holidays in which he would not profit in anyway. Twenty-five percent of the total profit is planning to benefit economically challenged students to help them pursue an education.

There has been discussion in the news and social media because many of his fans believe that he should not continue his collaboration with Barney’s because of their racial profiling.

Saturday, Jay-Z announced that he had been “demonized” over his new collaboration and has been under pressure from all ends of social media to end his involvement with Barneys.

There have been Twitter remarks made to Jay-Z about this situation.

An online petition was even made to convince Jay-Z to drop his partnership with Barneys. This petition spread all over social media. This petition has received 13,670 signatures.

On top of all the social media recognition about this heated petition, people have been criticizing Jay-Z for not speaking publicly about his thoughts on the issue. This has even landed him on the cover of the New York Daily News.

Yesterday, Jay-Z spoke out. He stated, “I haven’t made any comments because I am waiting on facts and the outcome of a meeting between community leaders and Barneys.”

Because Jay-Z has such fame and such a large following, any news about him could and most definitely will cause a social media uproar with people sharing their opinions. If the news was not as established as it is today, people would be unable to retrieve all the information and they wouldn’t have the capability to share their opinions within social media networks. They also would not have been able to gather so many names on a petition.

In my opinion, social media are great for advertisers and for sharing news within seconds, but they also allow for a platform of negative opinions to be shared, petitions to be made, and people’s lives and reputations to be tainted.

After understanding what Jay-Z is going through, I began to think about how peoples lives would be changed drastically if social media did not exist because people would make more of their own decisions.

Social media is essentially creating a persuasive stream of comments that are unnecessary and that just simply complicate people’s lives.

There is news being created that is simply stemming from what people say on social media. If social media was eliminated this whole era of news would be eliminated.

Twitter hires first head of news

By SHAI FOX SAVARIAU

Twitter just made a big move by hiring Vivian Schiller, NBC News’ chief digital officer, as its first head of news and journalism partnerships. She also has had prior experience at CNN, The New York Times, and National Public Radio.

Schiller will be the person who connects Twitter to prominent news organizations. Twitter executives have been saying for months that they want to help media companies distribute news and now they have the right person for the job.

It is also said that she was hired due to the fact that there have been complaints about Twitter’s Board of Directors being mostly made up of white men. Her hiring adds diversity to the company.

Twitter has been hiring a number of prominent people to be heads of other departments like music and sports.

I get the feeling that this is just another step towards social media taking over journalism. A head of news and journalism partnerships at a social media company is already very different from how social media have been operating in the past, not to mention the fact that high profile people, like Schiller, are leaving their high profile jobs, like at NBC, to work there.

I also feel that this is a strategy for Twitter to be on top of all other social media sites. If Twitter is hiring people to make stronger relations with other companies, then that means it will have the support from multiple diverse organizations.

Journalism is a important part of society, and if Twitter is taking that leap to make it a prominent part of their site, then it will be more widely used by people.

Mental illness, media in today’s society

By ALEXANDRA SILVER

Just yesterday, a young boy who was attending a middle school in Nevada, wounded two students, shot and killed his teacher and then proceeded to kill himself in a random act of violence.

This is a devastating story as a little under a year ago, 26 people were killed at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. Although the shooter was much younger in this case, the concept of mental illness is still at the forefront of our minds.

Is violence directly linked to mental illness’ and ‘are all mentally ill people potentially dangerous’ are the questions circulating through the news media and in every household after the recent shooting in both Nevada and Connecticut.

Many researchers, psychologists and news programs immediately turned to the idea that untreated mental illness and our countries failing mental health system are the main reasons these massacres occur.

We ask ourselves many questions; are these mass murders preventable? If our society was more accepting to responding to the issue of mental illness, could we prevent school, mall, and movie theater shootings? Many of us are afraid to reference mental illness as a cause for violence, as we do not want to insult or put blame on those who do in fact have a mental illness.

There are certain disorders, which can create manic behavior, while other mental illnesses are harmless to others. By accusing those with mental illness, we are successfully convincing the public that all those who suffer from one are dangerous and capable of killing others. This idea, of course, is false, but our country faces the challenge of preventing these issues.

Social media bullying takes lives

By AXEL TURCIOS

Bullying is a social problem that, according to experts, comes directly from home. For some people, it is a way to gain self-confidence by hurting others and getting some attention.

This week has been a very tough one for a Florida family that lost its daughter in September. Twelve-year-old Rebecca Sedwick jumped off to her death on an abandoned cement area in Lakeland, Fla., after been cruelly bullied by two girls.

Based on reports, 14-year-old Guadalupe Shaw and 12-year-old Katelyn Roman started brutally bullying Sedwick almost a year ago. Both suspects were arrested this week after Shaw confessed on a message posted on her Facebook profile that said: “Yes IK I bullied REBECCA and she killed her self but IDGAF.”

The girl said she did not write such message and mentioned someone had possibly hacked her Facebook page. While the other suspect accepted she bullied Sedwick and showed remorse.

The alleged abuses started when Guadalupe began dating Rebbecca’s former boyfriend. The two girls were once friends, but having feelings for the same boy soured their relationship.

This story has indeed lift up a national emergency call to beware of bullies. Many parents around the country have raised campaigns to raise awareness announcing the existence of bullying.

However, many are questioning if parents do really influence their kids’ behavior?

In this case, the answer seems to be yes.

Not long after Guadalupe’s arrest, her stepmother 30-year-old Vivian Vosburg was arrested Friday afternoon, after authorities released a video that showed Vosburg beating two kids while she called them obscenities.

Polk County Sheriff Graddy Judd, mentioned that it was unbelievable that this woman was the same person that at least told two media outlets that her daughter wouldn’t do something as bullying.

He also said, “the apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.”

Rebecca would have been 13 this weekend, but the continuous abuses took charge of her conscience leading to a dramatic turn.

Many media outlets also reported that police confiscated the laptops and cellphones of at least 15 girls connected to the bullying saga.

Horrible messages such as “nobody cares about you,” “I hate you,” you seriously deserve to die,” were found on these computers that apparently nobody knew of.

But, is it cyber bullying a new problem that parents must be aware of?

According to Sergio Llanes, a psychologist specialized in bullying and domestic violence, more than half of the population does not know about cyber bullying. Most parents never check up their kids’ electronic devices. In a sense, this makes them more prone to be verbally and mentally abuse to he point like Rebecca. The girl felt lost and beaten down that in her mind the way off was to end with her life.

The victim’s mother sent a message to other parents on Facebook.

“I am doing my very best to make sure that other parents are made aware of how serious of a problem bullying is and I hope you are proud of me and satisfied with my progress. I am also working hard to make sure those that wronged you pay the price for what they did to you!!” she wrote.